Registering for the Forum

We require a human profile pic upon registration on this forum.

After registration is submitted, you will receive a confirmation email, which should contain a link to confirm your intent to register for the forum. At this point, you will not yet be registered on the forum.

Our Support staff will manually approve your account within 24 hours, and you will get a notification. This is to prevent the many spam account signups which we receive on a daily basis.

If you have any problems completing this registration, please email support@jackkruse.com and we will assist you.

PEER review fallacy persists.......and will be used to control you eventually.

As debates continue about citing preprints vs 'peer-reviewed' papers, important to note that there are other experiments that undermine the [flawed] premise that peer-reviewed = established = citable

The reviewers do not believe the biophysics because they do not even know it is physically possible and plausible in biology for this to happen. Is it no wonder why our chronic disease metric grow as the experts sit by and argue about things they are DEAD wrong about?

The public good and health are being destroyed by how we do science today.

Reviewers found this not believable and technically flawed. Yet e-life chose to publish it. I agree with that decision to publish it and then let people dissect the paper themselves without the interference of the editors of PEER panel. If the paper sucks we'll figure it out. This is how public reviews of restaurants close bad restaurants fast in New Orleans. Not publishing controversial papers buries critical gems found in labs.

Of course, the idea that all peer-reviewed literature is perfect is not true. But the expert scientist will fight hard on social media to tell the public it is reliable because it is part of their lifeblood and career. They are protecting their turf, but fail to realize this turf is OWNED by the PUBLIC who pays for this research. We have copious amounts of evidence it is horribly flawed. But just because it doesn't work perfectly, doesn't mean it's not working some of the time or the majority of the time. Remember that scientists are NOT the only users of the scientific literature!

Press folks, reporters, funding agencies (not necessarily govt), patients, policymakers may not appreciate the caveats or read the reviewers' comments. I'm not convinced this improves the perceived credibility of the literature. IMO, editors should not be gatekeepers in science that is new or cutting edge. Their biases limit the production of innovative science experiments.

The whole point of that e-Life journal experiment was that ALL papers sent out to be peer reviewed would be published with reviews, good or bad. This is the way things should work. The challenge is to get the mechanics right and to show people how & why it’s better for the public.

Regulating G protein-coupled receptors by topological inversion was the paper.

None of the idiot scientist critiquing this review process on social media understands how 1G-5G cause topologic inversion.......and this paper shows its blood and guts of how the process can be broken in cells by nnEMF. The paper is flawed but the mechanism is so clear of how topologic changes induce downstream effects in cells that will lead to emergent diseases and symptoms in many patients shocking patients and doctors.

This topic of topology is going to be a critical understanding of any Black Swan soon.........It is why Kawasaki's disease and measles are being confused in ER's all over America now and Big Pharma will use the confusion to push for mandatory vaccines. Know one see the end game until they feel it in their biology.

This is a wake-up call kind of paper that reminds of this passage from Atlas Shrugged.

“I quit when medicine was placed under State control, some years ago,” said Dr. Hendricks. “Do you know what it takes to perform a brain operation? Do you know the kind of skill it demands, and the years of passionate, merciless, excruciating devotion that go to acquire that skill? That was what I would not place at the disposal of men whose sole qualification to rule me was their capacity to spout the fraudulent generalities that got them elected to the privilege of enforcing their wishes at the point of a gun. I would not let them dictate the purpose for which my years of study had been spent, or the conditions of my work, or my choice of patients, or the amount of my reward. I observed that in all the discussions that preceded the enslavement of medicine, men discussed everything—except the desires of the doctors. Men considered only the ‘welfare’ of the patients, with no thought for those who were to provide it. That a doctor should have any right, desire, or choice in the matter, was regarded as irrelevant selfishness; his is not to choose, they said, only ‘to serve.’ That a man who’s willing to work under compulsion is too dangerous a brute to entrust with a job in the stockyards—never occurred to those who proposed to help the sick by making life impossible for the healthy.”

“I have often wondered at the smugness with which people assert their right to enslave me, to control my work, to force my will, to violate my conscience, to stifle my mind—yet what is it that they expect to depend on when they lie on an operating table under my hands? Their moral code has taught them to believe that it is safe to rely on the virtue of their victims. Well, that is the virtue I have withdrawn. Let them discover the kind of doctors that their system will now produce. Let them discover, in their operating rooms and hospital wards that it is not safe to place their lives in the hands of a man whose life they have throttled. It is not safe if he is the sort of many who resents it—and still less safe if he is the sort who doesn’t.”

Another interesting passage from Atlas Shrugged deeply related to recent conversations with several friends of mine in the medical profession.

There are many things that seem impossible to expert scientist only so long as "the ignorant" does not attempt them or understand them. This is why cutting edge papers never see the light of day. Bias blocks their review by eyes who need Windex sprayed on them.

Could measles outbreaks be confused with Kawasaki's Disease in a world of 5G? Yep, because both are caused by alterations in topology. My July 2015 webinar on KD was specifically made to warn clinicians and patients of what is coming to ER's with 5G toxicity in our ionosphere above our heads. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5937975/ …
The cause of this extinction is hidden yet, the effect is visible to all mankind = use of the spectrum of light outside the visible to excess to communicate.